Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach - Book Report/Review Example

Cohen and Marcus (1979) present a Routine Activity Approach in evaluating crime rate trends and cycle. Instead of concentrating on the behaviors of offenders, the authors emphasize on the circumstances that trigger the offender to engage into delinquent behaviors. Some of the circumstances that may increase the rate of crime rates includes, favorable environment for potential offenders, appropriate targets where to cause a criminal act and potential persons that endorse crime (Cohen & Marcus, 1979). In order to regulate the rate of crime, these three factors must be kept constant. In testing, the theory, Cohen and Marcus (1979), applies the human ecological theory concept in conducting an investigation on the way the society produces the three factors, encouraging crime acts to cause chaos in the society. The authors argue that, the absence of any of the three factors impedes occurrence of criminal activities. In their findings, Cohen and Marcus (1979) assert that the union of the suitable targets and absence of potential persons to cause crime may result to a high increase in criminal acts even without depending on the structural circumstances that trigger individuals to engage in criminal acts. That is to say, if the ratio of potential targets were to remain constant in the society, altering the routine activities could; however, change the probability of their union, and this develops more chances for occurrence of crimes (Cohen & Marcus, 1979). Therefore, controlling the crimes becomes very important. In case of reduction in controls, through the routine activities, there is a likelihood of an increase in criminal acts. However, it is difficult for this study to provide a concrete explanation on how the alteration in the social structure bring changes in getting involved in criminal activities and, therefore, accounting for crime rate trends. In their study, the authors integrated various assumptions in illustrating the feasibility of the Routine Activity theory (Cohen & Marcus, 1979). From the Micro-Level Assumption the activities carried out near homes and family activities reduce risks of criminal activities than activities carried away from homes. Another assumption from routine activity approach is that, target suitability determines the occurrence of criminal acts (Cohen & Marcus, 1979). In the process of explaining and assessing the existing the validity of the existing data, they related their approach to classical human ecological concepts. However, this study lacks validity because it fails to identify the social trends and their relationship to predatory criminal victimization. In support of their study, they provided a variety of data which explains the crime rate trends in United States between 1947 and 1974. Article 2: Katherine, A.J. Veneziano, L.G. (2006). Routine Activity Theory and Sexual Deviance among Male College Students, October 2006, Volume 21, Issue 7, pp 449-460. The article presents an argument that group association is not a reliable technique to use in conducting an investigation on sexual deviant behavior among the male college students. The authors propose that there are variables that can provide reliable data on sexual deviant behaviors among the male college students (Katherine & Veneziano, 2006). For instance, opportunity and other behaviors prior the real sexual deviant behaviors could account for sexual deviance. The outcome of the study is supportive of this study. Most significantly, is that, according to the findings, the affiliation between prior deviance and sexually violent behavior is interceded by individual opportunity (Katherine & Veneziano, 2006). The data used in the study endorses the hypothesis that persons with a record of deviant deeds have a likelihood of portraying sexually deviant behaviors. In their findings, the authors summed up that, the individuals with records of deviant behaviors have a likelihood of portraying similar deviant behaviors in their future life. In addition, it is indicative that deviant persons do not dedicate themselves into particular forms of deviant actions (Katherine & Veneziano, 2006). Also, the authors found out that, if a person has a history of deviant behavior, there is a probability for that person to engage into some particular behaviors despite of his group association. Furthermore, the authors’ assertion is that the criminal’s prior delinquent behavior is a significant variable in illustrating sexual deviant behaviors with male college students, group affiliation members and the entire college students (Katherine & Veneziano, 2006). In line with that, another assertion from the authors is that, there exists no variance between the groups and their susceptibility to engaging in deviant behaviors. In addition, the results from the study support the assumption that prior deviance and sexually violent behavior are interceded by individual opportunity. Even though, opportunity may be found relevant in measuring routine activities, it should not be relied upon, and instead researchers should consider other measurements (Katherine & Veneziano, 2006). In summation, the study supports the routine activity theory that, group affiliation is a reliable variable in determining sexually deviant behavior of male college students, and instead, other alternative variables should be used (Katherine & Veneziano, 2006). Article 3: Mustaine, E., Tewksbury, R. (1998). Predicting Risks of Larceny Theft Victimization: A Routine Activity Analysis, Criminology; Nov; 36, 4; Research Library pg. 829. The authors present a Routine activity theory that is characterized by envisaging risks of larceny theft victimization. The theory is overwhelmed by great dependence on alternative measures of lifestyle. The alternative measures comprise of variables that are commonly used as determinants of lifestyle and behaviors. For instance, the article suggests that, there is a likelihood of unmarried people to be involved in delinquent behaviors since they engage for social activities, mostly in dark hours. The article suggests that, there is a need to specify and detail on the particular lifestyles that bring to full comprehension of the association between the lifestyle behaviors and theft victimization risks (Mustaine & Tewksbury, 1998). In addition, it is also significant to classify both the major and minor larceny victimization. The two models reveal a close similarity as well as some vital variances. Therefore, this brings us to an accord that, it is important to specify an offence that leads to theft victimization, rather than examining general offences. In their findings (Mustaine &Tewksbury (1998), summed up that, theft victimization risks for college students are triggered by their engagement in other delinquent behaviors, for instance, drug abuse, intimidating others using dangerous weapons or without any weapons (Mustaine & Tewksbury, 1998). In addition, social activities they engage in influence them to engage in theft risks, for instance, hanging out with friends and other demographic features, for instance, their gender race, and type of environment. Therefore, general measures in determining major and minor theft victimization are not reliable variables in predicting theft victimization risk (Mustaine & Tewksbury, 1998). Integrating the three articles Routine theory Routine theory maintains that some criminal acts and behaviors are plagued by lifestyles. As discussed in the three articles, Routine activity theory works on the assumption that those people that are not married are susceptible to being expose to victimized risks since they have a habit of engaging in social activities mostly during the late hours, or in the evenings (Mustaine & Tewksbury, 1998). In addition, from the various assertions in the articles, the lifestyle of people and their behavior pattern increase their vulnerability to victimization by enhancing their contact with potential victims (Katherine & Veneziano, 2006). Routine theory also asserts that the structural surroundings and alteration in personal routine activities may influence crime rates by influencing the convergence in space and time of three elements of direct-contact voracious violations. These elements are; motivated offenders, appropriate targets and absence of a competent guardian (Cohen & Marcus, 1979). The article used data from various subsample of respondents from the year 2008 to 2009 in surveying British Crime survey. . References Lawrence E. and Felson, M. (1979). “Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach.” American Sociological Review. 44:588-605 Mustaine, E., Tewksbury, R. (1998).Predicting Risks of Larceny Theft Victimization: A Routine Activity Analysis, Criminology; Nov; 36, 4; Research Library pg. 829. Katherine, A.J. Veneziano, L.G. (2006). Routine Activity Theory and Sexual Deviance among Male College Students, October 2006, Volume 21, Issue 7, pp 449-460. Read More